The petitioner contended that the dishonored cheques were not...

The petitioner contended that the dishonored cheques were not issued against any legally enforceable debt, claiming they were given as blank security cheques to one Vinod Tiwari for a loan. However, the petitioner failed to substantiate this claim through evidence or cross-examination of the respondent. Merely reiterating contentions without adducing material to show the loan existed with Vinod Tiwari was insufficient to dislodge the presumptions raised u/ss 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court found no infirmity in the impugned order, as the petitioner failed to rebut the presumptions, and dismissed the petition, exercising restraint from reappreciating evidence unless the order was wholly unreasonable or untenable.